Search Results

1. Mane - Waihou A8C1B1 (2015) 117 Taitokerau MB 215 (117 TTK 215) [pdf, 293 KB]

   ...Rahiri Road. 8 This would appear to have been an uncontested application. The boundaries of the occupation order are relevant to Barney’s current application for partition. Current applications [12] Since 2005 several applications have been filed that concern the homestead, the land interests gifted to Lawrence and Barney, and other land interests that remain in Lucy’s name. Most of the outstanding applications have been the subject of hearings before other Judges. They o...

2. Mok v Boyd [2010] NZWHT Auckland 29 [pdf, 264 KB]

   ...remedial work was lodged on 29 October 2008 and on 1 December 2008 the claimants wrote to the respondents advising them that they would be held liable for the remedial costs. THE CLAIMS AGAINST EACH RESPONDENT [10] When the claimants filed their claim in the Tribunal on 18 December 2009 they were represented by a lay representative, Allison Livingstone of Lighthouse NZ Limited (Lighthouse), a firm offering guidance and support to leaky home owners. Although the claim...

3. Dablo v Tan [2013] NZIACDT 28 (20 May 2013) [pdf, 234 KB]

   ...lodged without Ms Dablo’s involvement, as she said Ms Dablo needed a copy so she could answer questions if the Authority contacted her. [32] This appeal was rejected and notice given in a letter from the Authority on 20 January 2010, as it was filed out of time. Further payments without receipt [33] Mr Mehta again met with Ms Dablo in New Zealand. The meeting was in Auckland and it appears to have likely been in November 2009. [34] A further $700 was requested by Mr Mehta and paid...

4. LCRO 121/2017 PT v BD (25 July 2018) [pdf, 266 KB]

   ...advised MOH Ltd that grounds existed for it to file a counterclaim against EFI Ltd. [10] MOH Ltd and Mr BD agreed that Mr BD would review the evidence and prepare a statement of defence to the EFI Ltd litigation, and prepare a counterclaim to be filed and served on EFI Ltd. It was agreed that this work would be completed for a fixed fee of $30,000 plus GST (the fixed fee arrangement). [11] At that initial stage, it was anticipated that both the EFI Ltd litigation and the counterc...

5. [2019] NZEnvC 098 The Otahuao Burial Ground Trust v Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga [pdf, 13 MB]

   ...20 working days; THE OTAHUAO BURIAL GROUND TRUST v HERITAGE NEW ZEALAND POU HERE TAONGA 2 b) Heritage NZ is to provide its comments on these to the Appellant and the Applicant within a further 15 working days; c) The Appellant is then to file its comments, if any, to the Applicant and Heritage NZ within 10 working days; d) Heritage NZ will then prepare its proposed Authority and management plan as a result of those comments and file the same with a memorandum setting out any...

6. Crosswell v Auckland City Council [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...evidence of moisture ingress occurring at: (a) The entry to the lower level stairwell; (b) The garage wall; (c) The wall beside the windows in the lower lounge; and (d) The lining of the rear wall of bedroom four. [5] The Trust immediately filed a claim with the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service (“WHRS”) under the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2002. In October 2006, the claimants engaged Pacific Environment NZ Limited (“Pacific Environments”) to...

7. RIS - Control Orders [pdf, 918 KB]

   ...engaging in terrorism, while also allowing them to live within the community and reintegrate into New Zealand (lowering the longer-term risk of engagement in terrorism). Supervision of high-risk individuals, in a way that can address changing risk profiles and limits their ability to engage in terrorist-related activity, provides a cost- effective way for government to meet public safety needs while supporting longer term reintegration of returnees into New Zealand society. The a...

8. [2019] NZEmpC 98 Noble v Ballooning Canterbury.com Ltd [pdf, 565 KB]

   ...reduced amount for the small balloon at $200 per flight. [14] The parties did not discuss Mr Noble’s contractual status; nor was there an exchange of emails or other correspondence confirming what had been agreed. Mr Oakley, however, made a file note as to the terms he said had been offered. [15] I interpolate Mr Oakley’s evidence that Mr Noble would be required to fly if BCL had arranged bookings for a particular date; and that it was common ground that whether a flight whi...

9. LCRO 111/2024 MS v PC (24 March 2025) [pdf, 273 KB]

   ...commented also that the applicant made much of being a former lawyer to whom the professional disciplinary regime did not apply. He described the complaint as “frivolous” and asked the Committee to take no further action on it. [17] The applicant filed a reply to the respondent’s response in which, relevantly, she submitted that: (a) as the holder of a practising certificate, the respondent was obliged to uphold the integrity of the profession and the administration of justice...

10. Solomon v Johnson - Te Mata E3 Block (2017) 139 Waikato Maniapoto MB 240 (139 WMN 240) [pdf, 508 KB]

    ...for the applicants dated 8 April 2016 at [4]. 139 Waikato Maniapoto MB 246 [20] In addition, I held a teleconference on 14 June 2016 with both counsel to determine the scope of the application and the relevant issues. In their memorandum filed prior to the teleconference, counsel for the applicants indicated that the issues for the Court were whether there was “agreement for the transfer of interests in a section of Te Mata E3 for the purpose of a permanent dwelling…”...